The competition between British police forces to be seen to be helping in the search for Madeleine McCann hampered the investigation into her disappearance and has had negative effects ever since, according to the author of a secret Home Office report.

Madeleine McCann: Secret Police Probe Report ReleasedThe Inquisitr - ‎8 hours ago‎In the aftermath of the investigation for McCann, the involvement of competing British police chiefs had a long-lasting negative impact on the investigation, according to the author of a secret British federal government report. The report on Madeleine's ...

Telegraph.co.uk - ‎14 hours ago‎He has refused to discuss the content of his report, but leaked details reveals that the intervention of multiple British police forces and crime agencies led to "frustration" and "resentment" among the Portuguese police who believed that their British counterparts ...

Express.co.uk - ‎10 hours ago‎Competing British police forces 'hampered Maddie investigation', secret report claims. BRITISH police forces competing to be seen to be helping with the search for Madeleine McCann hampered the investigation into her disappearance, according to a secret ...

Parentdish - ‎9 hours ago‎For the first time details have been leaked to Sky News, revealing that Mr Gamble criticised the Association of Chief Police Officers' decision to put Leicestershire Police in charge of the operation because the McCanns lived in the county, despite the fact the ...

The Guardian - ‎Sep 1, 2014‎The investigation into the disappearance of Madeleine McCann was hampered because British police forces competed against one another, according to the author of a secret Home Office report. Relations with Portuguese authorities were damaged as UK ...

International Business Times UK - ‎Sep 1, 2014‎The search for missing Madeleine McCann was hampered by the involvement of competing UK police agencies, some of whom damaged relations with their Portuguese counterparts, according to an unpublished Home Office report. Maddie disappeared from ...

The Times (subscription) - ‎Sep 1, 2014‎Competition between British police forces to be seen to be helping in the search for Madeleine McCann has hampered the investigation, a secret review commissioned in 2009 by the government has concluded. The Association of Chief Police Officers put the Leicestershire force in charge ... British police were biased in favour of Madeleine's parents, the review found. Jim Gamble, the report's author, told Sky News that the intervention of competing police chiefs had had a long-term negative effect on the investigation.

Irish Independent - ‎1 hour ago‎The report, commissioned by former UK Home Secretary Alan Johnson in 2009, was delivered in 2010 and led to the Metropolitan Police reopening the probe into Madeleine's disappearance, but was never released. For the first time, details have been given ...

____________________

"This is a faithful saying, and worthy of all acceptation, that Christ Jesus came into the world to save sinners" - Paul's first letter to his disciple Timothy, 1 Timothy 1 v 15

Sorry to butt in without having read through the thread, but it looks like a relevant place to remind folk about Matt Baggott's statement to the Leveson inquiry. This is what he says re the McCann case:

50. The Inquiry understands that you were Chief Constable at the time when Madeleine McCann was abducted in Portugal. The Inquiry is interested to know how relationships with the media, both local and national, worked during this time. Were changes in procedures made as a result of the very large amount of media interest in the story? Was pressure put on your personnel by the media? Are you aware of any personnel leaking information to the media at this time, and if so, was disciplinary action taken? wrote:

The investigation into Madeleine McCann’s disappearance began on 3 May 2007 by the Portuguese Authorities. On 4 May 2007, Leicestershire Constabulary took up a liaison role with the Portuguese Police to assist them in their enquiries. On 8 May 2007 Leicestershire Constabulary was asked to co-ordinate the UK response to assist the Portuguese enquiry on behalf of the UK Government and Association of Chief Police Officers. The Gold Strategy set on this date established that it was a Portuguese-led enquiry and that all actions would comply with requirements of Portuguese law including their Judicial Secrecy Act.

As a result of this strategy, apart from one press conference, which was requested by the Portuguese authorities, Leicestershire Constabulary made no comment to the media in relation to the investigation and strict information security was applied to ensure that the rights of all parties and the interests of the Portuguese Police were protected. However, Leicestershire Constabulary did respond to media enquiries over our role in the investigation in confirming details that were subject of public record. This included the number of officers in various roles and the financial cost of our involvement.

Due to the unprecedented media interest in the UK, a co-ordination group was set up on behalf of law enforcement agencies and government departments to coordinate the media interaction and ensure that a consistent stance was taken. This co-ordinating group was chaired by the Head of Corporate Communications from Leicestershire Constabulary. That group has continued to meet as required since 2007.

Throughout the enquiry there was intense local, national and international media interest and speculation over every element of the investigation. Leicestershire Constabulary received 53 FOI requests, one of which was repeated on 15 occasions, many of which came from the media. As a direct result of this and the impact that it was having on the investigation Leicestershire Constabulary developed a Freedom of Information Publication Strategy. This provided clarity about what information would be published, and at what time and to minimise thenumber of requests made. The fact that we developed this publication strategy became a national news story in itself.

The intense media interest meant that thousands of sightings were generated world-wide many of which were reported to Leicestershire Constabulary - each needing operational time to properly address. The Portuguese authorities informed us that this was directing attention away from their core lines of enquiries.

Due to the vast quantity of local, national and international media that descended on the village of Rothley, Leicestershire, where the McCann family live, a large policing operation had to take place to ensure that villagers were able to go abouttheir daily business. We did have complaints from local residents about the media’s behaviour.

Whenever any event took place in Leicestershire relating to the investigation this again attracted huge interest to the extent that specific policing arrangements had to be made with the local airport, hotels and venues for the meetings to ensure there was no intrusion from the media.

Due to the thirst for information from the media, every individual working in Leicestershire supporting the Portuguese investigation signed a confidentiality agreement. Messages were also disseminated to all staff to make them aware that even private conversations with friends could be reported on in the media.

In the Autumn of 2007 there was extensive conjecture about the investigation which led me to write to all editors on two occasions (copies attached) imploring them not to speculate around the investigation because of the implications it may have for the enquiry. On each occasion I emphasised the importance of focusing in on the search for Madeleine rather than any other issue. As a result of continuedconjecture by one Sunday paper Leicestershire Constabulary filed a complaint with the Press Complaints Commission. The outcome was that the paper in question agreed to make a note on their file.

During the investigation the media quoted, who they claimed to be, unnamed Leicestershire police sources. These comments reported by the media bore little resemblance to the facts. However, Leicestershire Constabulary did conduct an enquiry to establish if any police employee could be identified as leaking information to the media. No such person was identified.

Although I am no longer Chief Constable of Leicestershire Constabulary, I am informed that almost five years on there is still speculation within some news media about Madeleine’s disappearance and that a number of groundless assertions continue to be made about the enquiry and the actions taken by Leicestershire Constabulary, UK Law Enforcement and the Police Judicaria.

I've taken that from the pdf document, which I believe can still be found online.

@Lance De Boils wrote:Sorry to butt in without having read through the thread, but it looks like a relevant place to remind folk about Matt Baggott's statement to the Leveson inquiry. This is what he says re the McCann case:

On 8 May 2007 Leicestershire Constabulary was asked to co-ordinate the UK response to assist the Portuguese enquiry on behalf of the UK Government and Association of Chief Police Officers. The Gold Strategy set on this date established that it was a Portuguese-led enquiry and that all actions would comply with requirements of Portuguese law including their Judicial Secrecy Act.

Due to the unprecedented media interest in the UK, a co-ordination group was set up on behalf of law enforcement agencies and government departments to coordinate the media interaction and ensure that a consistent stance was taken. This co-ordinating group was chaired by the Head of Corporate Communications from Leicestershire Constabulary. That group has continued to meet as required since 2007.

REST SNIPPED

I've taken that from the pdf document, which I believe can still be found online.

[My bold/underline/red.]

Thank you very much, Lance de Boils.

These words have utterly torpedoed Jim Gamble's FALSE claim (blindly recycled by our mainstream media automatons) of all these police officers supposedly running round in circles trying too hard to be helpful and sowing confusion in the ranks of the PJ. What utter rubbish!

Quite the contrary, a group from ACPO got together at the highest level, not IMO to help find Madeleine but to frustrate, block and divert the Portuguese investigation.

I wonder exactly who the 'Head of Corporate Communications' at Leics Police was? Was it Bob Small, the man who played such a big role in Jane Tanner claiming that it was Murat she'd seen carrying a child the evening of 3 May? Or was it his boss perhaps? And what role did Prime Minister Gordon Brown play in all this when he visited Braunstone Police Station, Leicester, two days after the McCanns returned from Portugal?

____________________

"This is a faithful saying, and worthy of all acceptation, that Christ Jesus came into the world to save sinners" - Paul's first letter to his disciple Timothy, 1 Timothy 1 v 15

@Lance De Boils wrote:Sorry to butt in without having read through the thread, but it looks like a relevant place to remind folk about Matt Baggott's statement to the Leveson inquiry. This is what he says re the McCann case:

50. The Inquiry understands that you were Chief Constable at the time when Madeleine McCann was abducted in Portugal. The Inquiry is interested to know how relationships with the media, both local and national, worked during this time. Were changes in procedures made as a result of the very large amount of media interest in the story? Was pressure put on your personnel by the media? Are you aware of any personnel leaking information to the media at this time, and if so, was disciplinary action taken? wrote:

The investigation into Madeleine McCann’s disappearance began on 3 May 2007 by the Portuguese Authorities. On 4 May 2007, Leicestershire Constabulary took up a liaison role with the Portuguese Police to assist them in their enquiries. On 8 May 2007 Leicestershire Constabulary was asked to co-ordinate the UK response to assist the Portuguese enquiry on behalf of the UK Government and Association of Chief Police Officers. The Gold Strategy set on this date established that it was a Portuguese-led enquiry and that all actions would comply with requirements of Portuguese law including their Judicial Secrecy Act.

As a result of this strategy, apart from one press conference, which was requested by the Portuguese authorities, Leicestershire Constabulary made no comment to the media in relation to the investigation and strict information security was applied to ensure that the rights of all parties and the interests of the Portuguese Police were protected. However, Leicestershire Constabulary did respond to media enquiries over our role in the investigation in confirming details that were subject of public record. This included the number of officers in various roles and the financial cost of our involvement.

Due to the unprecedented media interest in the UK, a co-ordination group was set up on behalf of law enforcement agencies and government departments to coordinate the media interaction and ensure that a consistent stance was taken. This co-ordinating group was chaired by the Head of Corporate Communications from Leicestershire Constabulary. That group has continued to meet as required since 2007.

Throughout the enquiry there was intense local, national and international media interest and speculation over every element of the investigation. Leicestershire Constabulary received 53 FOI requests, one of which was repeated on 15 occasions, many of which came from the media. As a direct result of this and the impact that it was having on the investigation Leicestershire Constabulary developed a Freedom of Information Publication Strategy. This provided clarity about what information would be published, and at what time and to minimise thenumber of requests made. The fact that we developed this publication strategy became a national news story in itself.

The intense media interest meant that thousands of sightings were generated world-wide many of which were reported to Leicestershire Constabulary - each needing operational time to properly address. The Portuguese authorities informed us that this was directing attention away from their core lines of enquiries.

Due to the vast quantity of local, national and international media that descended on the village of Rothley, Leicestershire, where the McCann family live, a large policing operation had to take place to ensure that villagers were able to go abouttheir daily business. We did have complaints from local residents about the media’s behaviour.

Whenever any event took place in Leicestershire relating to the investigation this again attracted huge interest to the extent that specific policing arrangements had to be made with the local airport, hotels and venues for the meetings to ensure there was no intrusion from the media.

Due to the thirst for information from the media, every individual working in Leicestershire supporting the Portuguese investigation signed a confidentiality agreement. Messages were also disseminated to all staff to make them aware that even private conversations with friends could be reported on in the media.

In the Autumn of 2007 there was extensive conjecture about the investigation which led me to write to all editors on two occasions (copies attached) imploring them not to speculate around the investigation because of the implications it may have for the enquiry. On each occasion I emphasised the importance of focusing in on the search for Madeleine rather than any other issue. As a result of continuedconjecture by one Sunday paper Leicestershire Constabulary filed a complaint with the Press Complaints Commission. The outcome was that the paper in question agreed to make a note on their file.

During the investigation the media quoted, who they claimed to be, unnamed Leicestershire police sources. These comments reported by the media bore little resemblance to the facts. However, Leicestershire Constabulary did conduct an enquiry to establish if any police employee could be identified as leaking information to the media. No such person was identified.

Although I am no longer Chief Constable of Leicestershire Constabulary, I am informed that almost five years on there is still speculation within some news media about Madeleine’s disappearance and that a number of groundless assertions continue to be made about the enquiry and the actions taken by Leicestershire Constabulary, UK Law Enforcement and the Police Judicaria.

I've taken that from the pdf document, which I believe can still be found online.

[My bold/underline/red.]

Glad you did butt in Lance!

That feeds into what I have always thought about the Gaspar statement - that it went through a multi-agency committee before being forwarded on to the Portugese authorities (after about FOUR months!).

One point I would make - don't take this at face value as a being Police-led. Whatever the formal set up (e.g. ACPO taking the formal lead), this multi-agency committee will have been controlled by central government. It will have done nothing without their say-so. It might be that material coming to that committee was in fact being forwarded on to a central government committee for vetting...

These words have utterly torpedoed Jim Gamble's FALSE claim (blindly recycled by our mainstream media automatons) of all these police officers supposedly running round in circles trying too hard to be helpful and sowing confusion in the ranks of the PJ.

I don't imagine JG's claims have pleased OG - how will they be treated if they return to Portugal just to waste time? And the Portuguese will rub their noses in it if the court case appears to be going GA's way. As someone said, September is going to be interesting.

That feeds into what I have always thought about the Gaspar statement - that it went through a multi-agency committee before being forwarded on to the Portugese authorities (after about FOUR months!).

One point I would make - don't take this at face value as a being Police-led. Whatever the formal set up (e.g. ACPO taking the formal lead), this multi-agency committee will have been controlled by central government. It will have done nothing without their say-so. It might be that material coming to that committee was in fact being forwarded on to a central government committee for vetting...

Indeed, Baggott does say

a co-ordination group was set upon behalf oflaw enforcement agenciesand government departments

His first statements, if they had been true, would have, or might have been specifically designed to sabotage the final stages of the McCanns' Damages claim against Dr Amaralm by making it clear that it was BritPol and lack of coordination which scuppered the "search" or the enquiry in its early stage, and that the book played no part in this..Why would he do this, rather than wait until the McCanns had trousered Dr Amaral's money.

Now we know that his statement was not true it leaves us with two possibilities1 He knew it was not so, and has lied2 He is just stupid and ignorant of what was happening

If he has lied he must have realised that his lie would be discovered. In this case by LdB within minutes, but ultimately someone else would or might have spoken up to defend the honour and reputation of the co-ordinating committee. The Chairman, for example, whose professionalism has now been traduced.

If he is merely ignorant and stupid, then he can join the list of those who speak on behalf of the McCanns without knowing the facts, or who blatantly refuse to look, in case they see something which causes them to think for themselves.

His first statements, if they had been true, would have, or might have been specifically designed to sabotage the final stages of the McCanns' Damages claim against Dr Amaralm by making it clear that it was BritPol and lack of coordination which scuppered the "search" or the enquiry in its early stage, and that the book played no part in this..Why would he do this, rather than wait until the McCanns had trousered Dr Amaral's money.

Now we know that his statement was not true it leaves us with two possibilities1 He knew it was not so, and has lied2 He is just stupid and ignorant of what was happening

If he has lied he must have realised that his lie would be discovered. In this case by LdB within minutes, but ultimately someone else would or might have spoken up to defend the honour and reputation of the co-ordinating committee. The Chairman, for example, whose professionalism has now been traduced.

If he is merely ignorant and stupid, then he can join the list of those who speak on behalf of the McCanns without knowing the facts, or who blatantly refuse to look, in case they see something which causes them to think for themselves.

PeterMac, as I understand things, with regards to the Lisbon trial there is no more evidence to be produced. It is a summing up process (closing arguments) and is only pertinent to the original writ. It's a closed entity. Whatever Gamble or anyone else says it can't affect the outcome of the trial imo. The judge deals with what is relevant to the writ and Court procedure.

@Lance De Boils wrote:Sorry to butt in without having read through the thread, but it looks like a relevant place to remind folk about Matt Baggott's statement to the Leveson inquiry. This is what he says re the McCann case:

On 8 May 2007 Leicestershire Constabulary was asked to co-ordinate the UK response to assist the Portuguese enquiry on behalf of the UK Government and Association of Chief Police Officers. The Gold Strategy set on this date established that it was a Portuguese-led enquiry and that all actions would comply with requirements of Portuguese law including their Judicial Secrecy Act.

Due to the unprecedented media interest in the UK, a co-ordination group was set up on behalf of law enforcement agencies and government departments to coordinate the media interaction and ensure that a consistent stance was taken. This co-ordinating group was chaired by the Head of Corporate Communications from Leicestershire Constabulary. That group has continued to meet as required since 2007.

REST SNIPPED

I've taken that from the pdf document, which I believe can still be found online.

[My bold/underline/red.]

Thank you very much, Lance de Boils.

These words have utterly torpedoed Jim Gamble's FALSE claim (blindly recycled by our mainstream media automatons) of all these police officers supposedly running round in circles trying too hard to be helpful and sowing confusion in the ranks of the PJ. What utter rubbish!

Quite the contrary, a group from ACPO got together at the highest level, not IMO to help find Madeleine but to frustrate, block and divert the Portuguese investigation.

I wonder exactly who the 'Head of Corporate Communications' at Leics Police was? Was it Bob Small, the man who played such a big role in Jane Tanner claiming that it was Murat she'd seen carrying a child the evening of 3 May? Or was it his boss perhaps? And what role did Prime Minister Gordon Brown play in all this when he visited Braunstone Police Station, Leicester, two days after the McCanns returned from Portugal?

Surely it would not be unreasonable to request, under FOI Act, details of this 'co-ordination group'?It would be interesting to know, for starters:

@Lance De Boils wrote:Sorry to butt in without having read through the thread, but it looks like a relevant place to remind folk about Matt Baggott's statement to the Leveson inquiry. This is what he says re the McCann case:

On 8 May 2007 Leicestershire Constabulary was asked to co-ordinate the UK response to assist the Portuguese enquiry on behalf of the UK Government and Association of Chief Police Officers. The Gold Strategy set on this date established that it was a Portuguese-led enquiry and that all actions would comply with requirements of Portuguese law including their Judicial Secrecy Act.

Due to the unprecedented media interest in the UK, a co-ordination group was set up on behalf of law enforcement agencies and government departments to coordinate the media interaction and ensure that a consistent stance was taken. This co-ordinating group was chaired by the Head of Corporate Communications from Leicestershire Constabulary. That group has continued to meet as required since 2007.

REST SNIPPED

I've taken that from the pdf document, which I believe can still be found online.

[My bold/underline/red.]

Thank you very much, Lance de Boils.

These words have utterly torpedoed Jim Gamble's FALSE claim (blindly recycled by our mainstream media automatons) of all these police officers supposedly running round in circles trying too hard to be helpful and sowing confusion in the ranks of the PJ. What utter rubbish!

Quite the contrary, a group from ACPO got together at the highest level, not IMO to help find Madeleine but to frustrate, block and divert the Portuguese investigation.

I wonder exactly who the 'Head of Corporate Communications' at Leics Police was? Was it Bob Small, the man who played such a big role in Jane Tanner claiming that it was Murat she'd seen carrying a child the evening of 3 May? Or was it his boss perhaps? And what role did Prime Minister Gordon Brown play in all this when he visited Braunstone Police Station, Leicester, two days after the McCanns returned from Portugal?

Surely it would not be unreasonable to request, under FOI Act, details of this 'co-ordination group'?It would be interesting to know, for starters:

@Lance De Boils wrote:Sorry to butt in without having read through the thread, but it looks like a relevant place to remind folk about Matt Baggott's statement to the Leveson inquiry. This is what he says re the McCann case:

On 8 May 2007 Leicestershire Constabulary was asked to co-ordinate the UK response to assist the Portuguese enquiry on behalf of the UK Government and Association of Chief Police Officers. The Gold Strategy set on this date established that it was a Portuguese-led enquiry and that all actions would comply with requirements of Portuguese law including their Judicial Secrecy Act.

Due to the unprecedented media interest in the UK, a co-ordination group was set up on behalf of law enforcement agencies and government departments to coordinate the media interaction and ensure that a consistent stance was taken. This co-ordinating group was chaired by the Head of Corporate Communications from Leicestershire Constabulary. That group has continued to meet as required since 2007.

REST SNIPPED

I've taken that from the pdf document, which I believe can still be found online.

[My bold/underline/red.]

Thank you very much, Lance de Boils.

These words have utterly torpedoed Jim Gamble's FALSE claim (blindly recycled by our mainstream media automatons) of all these police officers supposedly running round in circles trying too hard to be helpful and sowing confusion in the ranks of the PJ. What utter rubbish!

Quite the contrary, a group from ACPO got together at the highest level, not IMO to help find Madeleine but to frustrate, block and divert the Portuguese investigation.

I wonder exactly who the 'Head of Corporate Communications' at Leics Police was? Was it Bob Small, the man who played such a big role in Jane Tanner claiming that it was Murat she'd seen carrying a child the evening of 3 May? Or was it his boss perhaps? And what role did Prime Minister Gordon Brown play in all this when he visited Braunstone Police Station, Leicester, two days after the McCanns returned from Portugal?

Surely it would not be unreasonable to request, under FOI Act, details of this 'co-ordination group'?It would be interesting to know, for starters:

His first statements, if they had been true, would have, or might have been specifically designed to sabotage the final stages of the McCanns' Damages claim against Dr Amaralm by making it clear that it was BritPol and lack of coordination which scuppered the "search" or the enquiry in its early stage, and that the book played no part in this..Why would he do this, rather than wait until the McCanns had trousered Dr Amaral's money.

Now we know that his statement was not true it leaves us with two possibilities1 He knew it was not so, and has lied2 He is just stupid and ignorant of what was happening

If he has lied he must have realised that his lie would be discovered. In this case by LdB within minutes, but ultimately someone else would or might have spoken up to defend the honour and reputation of the co-ordinating committee. The Chairman, for example, whose professionalism has now been traduced.

If he is merely ignorant and stupid, then he can join the list of those who speak on behalf of the McCanns without knowing the facts, or who blatantly refuse to look, in case they see something which causes them to think for themselves.

PeterMac, as I understand things, with regards to the Lisbon trial there is no more evidence to be produced. It is a summing up process (closing arguments) and is only pertinent to the original writ. It's a closed entity. Whatever Gamble or anyone else says it can't affect the outcome of the trial imo. The judge deals with what is relevant to the writ and Court procedure.

I'm sorry if I have legal terminology incorrect.

JG's statement won't impact and will have no relevance to the libel trial. Too late for evidence introducing, its just closing summary by lawyers to be followed by verdict.

It's clear Gamble has gone to bed with Summers helping him with the book. What's unclear is which of the two has the persuasion power and managed to convince Brunty to do a programme on CEOP as preview for the Summers' book? Can't have been Brunty own initiatives judging from the contents that are of no value for the public to know. Brunty's purpose for the programme was to keep Gamble and Summers' names in the limelight ahead of book release for a reason.

@Lance De Boils wrote:Sorry to butt in without having read through the thread, but it looks like a relevant place to remind folk about Matt Baggott's statement to the Leveson inquiry. This is what he says re the McCann case:

On 8 May 2007 Leicestershire Constabulary was asked to co-ordinate the UK response to assist the Portuguese enquiry on behalf of the UK Government and Association of Chief Police Officers. The Gold Strategy set on this date established that it was a Portuguese-led enquiry and that all actions would comply with requirements of Portuguese law including their Judicial Secrecy Act.

Due to the unprecedented media interest in the UK, a co-ordination group was set up on behalf of law enforcement agencies and government departments to coordinate the media interaction and ensure that a consistent stance was taken. This co-ordinating group was chaired by the Head of Corporate Communications from Leicestershire Constabulary. That group has continued to meet as required since 2007.

REST SNIPPED

I've taken that from the pdf document, which I believe can still be found online.

[My bold/underline/red.]

Thank you very much, Lance de Boils.

These words have utterly torpedoed Jim Gamble's FALSE claim (blindly recycled by our mainstream media automatons) of all these police officers supposedly running round in circles trying too hard to be helpful and sowing confusion in the ranks of the PJ. What utter rubbish!

Quite the contrary, a group from ACPO got together at the highest level, not IMO to help find Madeleine but to frustrate, block and divert the Portuguese investigation.

I wonder exactly who the 'Head of Corporate Communications' at Leics Police was? Was it Bob Small, the man who played such a big role in Jane Tanner claiming that it was Murat she'd seen carrying a child the evening of 3 May? Or was it his boss perhaps? And what role did Prime Minister Gordon Brown play in all this when he visited Braunstone Police Station, Leicester, two days after the McCanns returned from Portugal?

Surely it would not be unreasonable to request, under FOI Act, details of this 'co-ordination group'?It would be interesting to know, for starters:

Anything in relation to the investigation into the disappearance of Madeleine McCann will not be released whilst it remains ongoing. Consideration may be given to releasing certain material, ie. that which would not reveal police tactics, when the circumstances surrounding Madeleine’s disappearance are fully known and the person/people involved have been brought to justice and a suitable period for any appeal has elapsed.

Nothing about an ABDUCTION. Very carefully worded 'circumstances surrounding Madeleine's disappearance'So the PJ were not fooled and neither, it seems, were LeicsPol

@Lance De Boils wrote:4. What exactly was the "Gold Strategy" that was set on 8th May? Is this documented?

5. Which organisations and govt depts were/are represented by this group?

[/color]

Think "Gold" strategy refers to the lead agency with the co-ordinating role. This is usually the case in emergency planning that one agency is termed "Gold", being in charge of co-ordination. So I imagine a Gold strategy would involve setting up an incident room, dedicated phone lines, computer systems and the like. I think any evidence coming in would have been channelled through the multi-agency group. I suspect there was a lot of debate about what to do with the Gaspar letter.

I remain sceptical how far the Police were leading on this though. I think the Home Office/Justice Dept and the Foreign Office had a much bigger role.

Eddie and Keela alerted to items and places concerned with the McCanns - and importantly to no other items or places.

According to Eddie and Keela, the body of Madeleine McCann lay lifeless behind the sofa in Apartment 5a, clinging to the only thing from which she could derive any comfort; a soft toy called 'Cuddle cat'.

Kate's book 'madeleine', Page 219: "Did they really believe that a dog could smell the 'odour of death' three months later from a body that had been so swiftly removed?"

After forensic analysis of the 'Last Photo' there is little doubt now that the pool photo CANNOT POSSIBLY have been taken on the Thursday 3rd May, but most likely on the Sunday 29th April. So, where was Madeleine at lunchtime on Thursday?

John McCann:"This was terrible for them, Kate dressed Amelie in her sister's pyjamas and the baby said: "Maddy's jammies, where is Maddy?"Martin Roberts:"If Madeleine's pyjamas had not, in fact, been abducted then neither had Madeleine McCann."Dr Martin Roberts: A Nightwear Job

Death Toll in McCann Case

Gerry McCann called for an example to be made of 'trolls'. SKY reporter Martin Brunt doorstepped Brenda Leyland on 2 October 2014 after a 'Dossier' was handed in to Police by McCann supporters. She was then found dead in a Leicester hotel room the next day. Brenda paid the price.

Colin Shalke died suddenly in mysterious circumstances with a significant amount of morphine in his system. At the Inquest the coroner said there was no evidence as to how he had come to take morphine, and no needle mark was found.

Ex-Met DCI Andy Redwood had a "revelation moment" on BBC1's Crimewatch on 14th October 2013 when he announced that Operation Grange had eliminated the Tanner sighting - which opened up the 'window' of opportunity' from 3 mins to 45 mins, in accordance with their remit, to allow the staged abduction to happen.

Dr Gonçalo Amaral, retired PJ Coordinator: "The English can always present the conclusions to which they themselves arrived in 2007. Because they know, they have the evidence of what happened, they don't need to investigate anything. When MI5 opens their files, then we will know the truth."

Tracey Kandohla: "A McCann pal told The Sun Online: "Some of the savings have been siphoned off from the Find Maddie Fund into a fixed asset account, which financial experts have advised them to do. It can be used for purchases like buying a house or building equipment."

The McCanns, Operation Grange and the BBC are all working towards one goal - to make us keep looking at what happened (or didn't happen) on 3rd May, instead of looking at what happened days earlier. There is NO evidence of an abduction. Smithman is ALL they have got. Without that, they are sunk. No wonder Operation Grange clings on to Smithman...